Ask any teacher, nurse, or benefits advisor what they need to improve their work, and the answer is almost universal: more funding. After years of strain, this demand is deeply understandable. Frontline staff are exhausted, frustrated by systems that prevent them from delivering the quality of service they aspire to provide.
The Spending Paradox: More Money, Worse Outcomes
However, a stark and uncomfortable reality must be confronted. Public services are already costing a fortune, with the UK's tax burden hovering near record highs. Despite this investment, outcomes continue to deteriorate across health, education, and welfare. We are, it seems, spending more and receiving less in return.
According to Ryan Wain, Executive Director of Policy and Politics for the Tony Blair Institute, this isn't mere misfortune. It is the direct result of the absence of a coherent, overarching theory of reform in British politics since the New Labour era. Instead, governments have opted for fragmented, department-by-department tweaks, initiatives that address symptoms rather than root causes, and rebranding exercises that masquerade as progress.
The Power of a Joined-Up Plan
A clear, system-wide plan provides crucial leverage for the centre of government. It creates a productive tension with individual departments, forcing them to align with shared goals and expectations. This approach is vital because the complex challenges facing public services do not respect bureaucratic silos.
Consider a person developing a mental health condition. Their journey might involve a GP visit, absenteeism from school or work, and eventually a claim for benefits—where long-term inactivity can worsen their prospects. Improving NHS waiting times alone could still fail this individual, while ultimately costing the taxpayer more. A genuine theory of reform enables the state to connect these dots, tackle causes, and intervene earlier.
As Lord Reid notes in a foreword for the Tony Blair Institute, "in the absence of a shared theory of reform, rapid, visible, durable progress is absent." The New Labour years demonstrated the alternative. Its formula of combining choice and competition to drive quality and fairness was applied across government, yielding tangible results.
In the NHS, waiting times fell sharply and public satisfaction peaked at 70% in 2010. In education, initiatives like the London Challenge saw the proportion of London students achieving five or more A* to C grades at GCSE almost double between 1997 and 2013.
A Blueprint for the AI Era: Personalised, Preventative, Always-On
The argument today is not to simply resurrect that past model. The world has changed, and so have the tools available. The modern theory of reform must be fit for the AI era, envisioning a data-driven state offering services that are personalised, preventative, and available 24/7.
Most citizens already experience this seamless, adaptive service in the private sector through apps. For those who can afford it, similar innovation is emerging in private healthcare and education. This risks deepening inequality: by GCSEs, state school pupils are estimated to be 19 months behind their privately educated peers.
This is where the case for a secure, democratic digital ID becomes critical—not as a surveillance tool, but as essential infrastructure. As seen in countries like Estonia, it can give citizens control over their data and allow information to follow them across services with consent.
In practice, this could mean an NHS app that proactively manages health, prompting check-ups and flagging risks. In education and welfare, it means using AI to spot patterns—like long-term absenteeism—and intervening before crises escalate. And services must be available around the clock, moving beyond obsolete 9-to-5 models.
The fundamental gap in current politics is not a lack of commitment to public services, but the absence of a clear, modern model for change. AI-era public service reform could become this government's defining blueprint, restoring public trust, making the state more effective, and delivering the visible progress that, historically, has also proven to win elections.
